Author
Listed:
- Farhad Ahmadi
(Research Institute of Eco-Friendly Livestock Science, Institute of GreenBio Science Technology, Seoul National University, Pyeongchang 25354, Korea)
- Yan-Fen Li
(Graduate School of International Agricultural Technology, Seoul National University, Pyeongchang 25354, Korea)
- Eun-Chan Jeong
(Graduate School of International Agricultural Technology, Seoul National University, Pyeongchang 25354, Korea)
- Li-Li Wang
(Graduate School of International Agricultural Technology, Seoul National University, Pyeongchang 25354, Korea)
- Rajaraman Bharanidharan
(Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea)
- Jong-Geun Kim
(Research Institute of Eco-Friendly Livestock Science, Institute of GreenBio Science Technology, Seoul National University, Pyeongchang 25354, Korea
Graduate School of International Agricultural Technology, Seoul National University, Pyeongchang 25354, Korea)
Abstract
Undigested neutral detergent fiber (uNDF) is becoming more widely recognized as an important fiber fraction in forage quality assessment because it explains a portion of NDF that is inaccessible to digestion in the ruminant digestive system and is, thus, important in modeling the digestion kinetics of the potentially degradable component of NDF. In experiment 1, uNDF was determined in several forage species in order to compare the accuracy of two reference methods: (1) a long-term in vitro ruminal fermentation (240 h) using an Ankom Daisy II incubator and (2) a multi-step enzymatic method without ruminal fluid. The objective of experiment 2 was to construct predictive equations for uNDF estimation using acid detergent lignin (ADL) and near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) in a pool ( n = 264) of alfalfa hay, timothy hay, and tall fescue straw, using the most accurate reference method selected in experiment 1. Partial least squares regression analysis was used to calibrate the reference values against NIRS spectra. Several indicators were used to assess the performance of validation results, including standard error of cross-validation (SE CrV ), coefficient of determination of cross-validation ( R 2 CrV ), and ratio percentage deviation (RPD). The findings of experiment 1 suggested that, relative to the in vitro ruminal methodology, the enzymatic approach overestimated uNDF concentration of forages. Repeatability coefficient was also greater when uNDF was determined using the in vitro versus enzymatic procedure, potentially disqualifying the enzymatic method for the uNDF analysis in forages. In experiment 2, a poor relationship was established between ADL and uNDF ( R 2 < 0.60), suggesting the inadequacy of ADL parameter to represent the uNDF pool size in these forages. The best predictive equation using NIRS was obtained for alfalfa hay ( R 2 CrV = 0.92; SE CrV = 1.16; RPD = 3.57), using the in vitro fermentation as a reference method. The predictive equations were moderately accurate for timothy hay ( R 2 CrV = 0.80; SE CrV = 1.31; RPD = 2.08) and tall fescue straw ( R 2 CrV = 0.79; SE CrV = 1.38; RPD = 2.18). Our findings suggested the inadequacy of the enzymatic procedure in accurately determining uNDF concentration of forages as compared with the in vitro rumen fermentation protocol. Although the NIRS equations developed using the alfalfa hay dataset were more accurate than that of timothy hay and tall fescue straw, the validation results verified applicability of the equations as a fast screening tool for qualitative prediction of uNDF in these forages, which is important in commercial settings.
Suggested Citation
Farhad Ahmadi & Yan-Fen Li & Eun-Chan Jeong & Li-Li Wang & Rajaraman Bharanidharan & Jong-Geun Kim, 2022.
"Comparative Accuracy of In Vitro Rumen Fermentation and Enzymatic Methodologies for Determination of Undigested Neutral Detergent Fiber in Forages and Development of Predictive Equations Using NIRS,"
Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-16, November.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:11:p:1914-:d:971949
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:11:p:1914-:d:971949. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.